We performed a comparison between Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform and SUSE Manager based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Configuration Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The ability to wipe data from and reset devices is one of the most important and valuable features. If a device is reported stolen, we can freeze it or wipe the data from it, preventing data leakage."
"I like that we can implement conditional access."
"The aspects I find most valuable are the managing the data and applications. I can also restrict the users to install any applications. I can also wipe the data if the phone was missplaced or stolen. These are the basics for me."
"Its direct integration with all the other products that we have from Microsoft is valuable. We're using the E5 license, and we have a whole wealth of different products available. It just makes it easier to have everything from one provider."
"It is very easy to use. It has a very easy interface."
"The Autopilot feature is fantastic. It is a Microsoft product, so it deals best with Microsoft operating systems, but it can integrate with iOS, Mac OS, Linux, and Android."
"It provides control over all mobile devices that are being connected to the corporate network."
"As the solution is a software as a service, the scalability is unlimited."
"It is quick to production. It has an API in the back which allows for integrations."
"It is very extensible. There are many plugins and modules out there that everybody helps create to interact with different cloud providers as well."
"Ansible Galaxy is helpful for roles and Git Submodules: No dependency in managing playbooks. Also, fact caching in redis for host/role grp information speeds up execution. Finally, variable management is easy."
"The most valuable features of Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform are the agentless platform and writing the code is simple using the Yaml computer language."
"It has made our infrastructure more testable. We are able to build our infrastructure in CI, then are more confident in what we are deploying will work, not breaking everything."
"The solution is capable of integrating with many applications and devices in comparison to BigFix."
"There are no agents by default, so adding a new server is a matter of a couple lines of configuration (on a new server and the configuration master)."
"The initial setup is easy and takes a few hours to complete."
"The setup is straightforward."
"When it comes to managing both Red Hat and SUSE environments, it provides the support for live patching, which is something I really, really appreciate."
"SUSE Manager is the best solution for maintaining the Linux environment"
"SUSE Manager helps to optimize operations at a reduced cost."
"Intune does not provide real-time visibility."
"The synchronization could be improved."
"There could be more wizard-driven policy development or creation. Some of the policies can get quite complex. If they have a wizard that assists the administrators in creating the policy, that will be a great job."
"Microsoft Intune lags market leaders, such as Apperian, in its MAM capabilities."
"They need to add more group policies. Intune currently does not have many group policies that you can deploy. Its reporting, which is very limited at the moment, also needs improvement. It will be great if they can add report customization. Its stability needs to be improved. Sometimes, when you register a device in Intune, it doesn't show up instantly on the engine portal on the admin side. They need to provide better support for complicated issues. They also have a long turnaround time."
"The most important thing is reporting. They should improve their reporting. They should give a free hand to users. In SCCM, I can create my own reports. For example, in SCCM, I can create an inventory report for my PC or for all PCs, but in Intune, we don't have an option to create any report. Microsoft claims that Intune is a successor of SCCM, but SCCM is more powerful than Intune. So, they should develop Intune more and make it equivalent to SCCM. Then, their product will be great in the market."
"They need to integrate more with security options."
"It would be good if, in addition to the minimal patching and compliance, we could also use Intune for application deployment. For instance, if a device is not patched, Intune should have the ability to push not only a Microsoft patch but also other patches, such as a browser patch."
"The communication on it is not probably where it could be. We could use some real life examples where we could point customers to them and say, "This is what you are trying to do. If you follow these steps, it would at least get you started a bit quicker.""
"They should think of this product as an end-to-end solution and begin to develop it that way."
"Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is not the best at server provisioning. Terraform is better."
"The tool should allow us to create infrastructure. It has everything when it comes to management, but it lacks the provisioning aspect."
"It can use some more credential types. I've found that when I go looking for a certain credential type, such as private keys, they're not really there."
"I have seen indications that the documentation needs improvement. They are providing a "How to Improve Your Documentation" presentation at this conference."
"If we have a problem with some file and we need to get Red Hat to analyze the issue and the file is 100GBs, we'll have an issue since we need to provide a log file for them to analyze. If it is around 12GB or 13GB, we can easily upload it to the Red Hat portal. With more than 100GBs, it will fail. I heard it should cover up to 250GB for an upload, however, I find it fails. Therefore, Red Hat needs to provide a way to handle this."
"It could be easier to integrate Ansible with other solutions. No single tool can do everything. For example, we use Terraform for infrastructure and other solutions for configuration management and VMs."
"The initial stage is a bit complex, but after that, everything runs seamlessly."
"I really would like to have a broader library of VCP's or playbooks that I can deploy."
"It can be complex and difficult for users who are new to Linux and don't have any technical expertise."
"We sometimes have server issues and need to restart the service."
More Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is ranked 1st in Configuration Management with 58 reviews while SUSE Manager is ranked 13th in Configuration Management with 4 reviews. Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is rated 8.6, while SUSE Manager is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform writes "Capable of broad integrations with easy-to-operate infrastructure and user controls". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SUSE Manager writes "Easy to deploy, offers embedded monitoring, and is very stable". Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is most compared with Red Hat Satellite, Microsoft Configuration Manager, VMware Aria Automation, Microsoft Azure DevOps and Cisco DNA Center, whereas SUSE Manager is most compared with Red Hat Satellite, BigFix, AWS Systems Manager, Microsoft Configuration Manager and HashiCorp Terraform. See our Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform vs. SUSE Manager report.
See our list of best Configuration Management vendors.
We monitor all Configuration Management reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
